ANN: obfuscate 0.2.2
debatem1 at gmail.com
Sun Apr 11 06:49:01 CEST 2010
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 4:37 AM, Aahz <aahz at pythoncraft.com> wrote:
> In article <mailman.1734.1270954853.23598.python-list at python.org>,
> geremy condra <debatem1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Steven D'Aprano
>><steve at remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
>>>> Steven D'Aprano <steve at REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes:
>>>>> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not
>>>>> be used where high security is required.
>>>> Certainly no one should never use obfuscate's rot13 function for high
>>>> security. Use at least double-rot13 instead, or maybe even quadruple
>>>> rot13 ;-).
>>> Ha ha, that's funny! I've never heard that one before! *wink*
>>I think I lost a sarcasm detector to this line- are you being serious?
> There are people who have a .sig that says, "This message protected by
> double-rot13 for extra security." It's an extremely common jape.
I work in infosec. I've heard it ;)
More information about the Python-list